Described are techniques for determining progress of a transaction. A plurality of weights are received. Each of the weights indicates a weight for a different one of a plurality of tasks performed to complete processing for the transaction. At a point in time, a plurality of first metrics for the plurality of tasks are determined. Each of the plurality of first metrics corresponds to a first of the plurality of tasks and indicates an amount of the first task completed at the point in time. A second metric is determined indicating an amount of processing completed for the transaction at the point in time. The second metric is determined in accordance with the plurality of first metrics and the plurality of weights.
Legal claims defining the scope of protection. Each claim is shown in both the original legal language and a plain English translation.
1. A method for determining progress of a transaction comprising: receiving a plurality of weights, each of said plurality of weights indicating a weight for a different one of a plurality of tasks performed to complete processing for said transaction; determining, at a point in time, a plurality of first metrics for said plurality of tasks, each of said plurality of first metrics corresponding to a first of said plurality of tasks and indicating an amount of said first task completed at said point in time; and determining a second metric indicating an amount of processing completed for said transaction at said point in time, wherein said second metric is determined in accordance with said plurality of first metrics and said plurality of weights, wherein said determining said second metric includes determining an amount for each of said plurality of tasks by multiplying one of the plurality of first metrics for said each task by one of said plurality of weights corresponding to said each task, wherein at least a first of the plurality of weights associated with one of the plurality of tasks is more than a second of the plurality of weights associated with a different one of the plurality of tasks thereby indicating that the one task is expected to take longer to complete than said different one of the plurality of tasks.
A method for tracking transaction progress involves assigning weights to individual tasks within the transaction, where each weight represents the relative importance or expected duration of that task. As the transaction proceeds, the completion status of each task is measured using metrics. An overall progress metric for the transaction is then calculated by combining the individual task metrics, weighted according to their assigned weights. Tasks expected to take longer have higher weights, influencing the overall progress calculation more significantly. This weighted approach provides a more accurate representation of transaction completion than simply averaging task completion percentages.
2. The method of claim 1 , wherein each of said plurality of weights is an integer and each of said plurality of first metrics indicates a percentage.
The transaction progress method, as previously described, uses integer values for the weights assigned to each task. The metrics representing the completion status of each task are expressed as percentages, indicating the proportion of work completed for that particular task. This combination of integer weights and percentage-based task metrics allows for a straightforward and intuitive calculation of overall transaction progress.
3. The method of claim 1 , wherein each of said plurality of tasks determines a corresponding one of said plurality of first metrics representing progress of said each task.
In the transaction progress method, each individual task actively monitors its own progress and generates a metric that represents its current completion status. This self-monitoring by each task ensures that the overall progress calculation is based on accurate and up-to-date information about the state of each component within the transaction. Each task is responsible for providing its own progress metric.
4. The method of claim 3 , wherein said each task uses one or more other metrics to perform self monitoring of its progress.
The transaction progress method's tasks, which self-monitor progress, utilize additional metrics internally to track their own completion. A task might use file sizes, record counts, or other relevant data points to determine how far it has progressed. This allows each task to choose the most appropriate method for assessing its own progress, enhancing the accuracy of the overall transaction progress calculation.
5. The method of claim 1 , wherein each weight associated with one of said plurality of tasks indicates a number of units said one task contributes to progress of said transaction.
In the transaction progress method, the weight assigned to each task represents the number of units it contributes towards the overall completion of the transaction. A higher weight signifies that the task contributes more significantly to the transaction's progress, allowing for a nuanced and accurate assessment of the transaction's overall completion.
6. The method of claim 1 , wherein each weight associated with one of said plurality of tasks indicates an amount of time to complete said one task relative to an amount of time to complete said transaction.
The transaction progress method uses weights that represent the amount of time each task takes to complete relative to the total time expected for the entire transaction. This allows for an accurate assessment of transaction progress based on the time consumed by each task, providing insights into potential bottlenecks or delays. Tasks with longer completion times have higher weights.
7. The method of claim 1 , wherein said transaction includes a first task to destage a cache and said first task monitors an amount of said cache destaged in connection with determining one of said plurality of first metrics representing an amount of said first task completed at said point in time.
In the transaction progress method, one specific task is the destaging of a cache. This task monitors the amount of data destaged from the cache to determine its completion progress. The amount of cache destaged is used as one of the metrics to represent the completion status of this specific task, contributing to the overall transaction progress calculation.
8. The method of claim 7 , wherein said first task determines a first number of entries in said cache to be destaged at a start of said first task and a second number of entries in said cache destaged at said point in time.
In the transaction progress method featuring cache destaging, the destaging task tracks the total number of entries that need to be destaged at the beginning of the task. It also tracks the number of entries that have been destaged at a specific point in time. By comparing these two numbers, the task can determine its progress and generate a metric representing its completion status.
9. The method of claim 1 , wherein said transaction corresponds to a root node in a tree at a first level and each of said plurality of tasks corresponds to a child node of said root node at a second level.
In the transaction progress method, the transaction and its constituent tasks are represented as a tree structure. The root node of the tree corresponds to the overall transaction, and the child nodes at the next level represent the individual tasks that comprise the transaction. This hierarchical representation allows for a structured and organized approach to tracking transaction progress.
10. The method of claim 9 , wherein each of said plurality of tasks includes a plurality of other tasks, said each task having a first corresponding node in the tree, each of said plurality of other tasks being represented by a node in the tree which is a descendant node of said first node.
In the tree-based transaction progress method, individual tasks can be further broken down into sub-tasks, creating a multi-level tree structure. Each task has a corresponding node in the tree, and its sub-tasks are represented by descendant nodes. This allows for a granular and hierarchical approach to tracking progress, where individual tasks can have their own internal progress metrics.
11. The method of claim 10 , wherein said transaction determines said second metric by requesting each of said plurality of first metrics from each of said plurality of tasks.
In the tree-based transaction progress method, the overall transaction determines its progress by querying each of its constituent tasks for their individual progress metrics. The root node of the tree requests progress information from its child nodes, which in turn may request progress information from their descendant nodes. This allows for a top-down approach to aggregating progress information.
12. The method of claim 11 , wherein each of said plurality of tasks having a first node in the tree determines one of said plurality of first metrics indicating progress of said each task by requesting progress information from any tasks having corresponding nodes in said tree which are descendant nodes of said first node and aggregating said progress information.
In the tree-based transaction progress method, each task determines its own progress by requesting progress information from its descendant tasks and aggregating the received information. This allows tasks to track their own progress based on the completion status of their sub-tasks, providing a comprehensive and accurate assessment of their overall completion.
13. A method for determining progress of a transaction comprising: representing said transaction including a plurality of tasks as a tree, wherein said tree includes a plurality of levels with a root node corresponding to the transaction at a first level and each, of said plurality of tasks having a node in the tree at a level other than said first level which is a descendant of said root node; receiving a plurality of weights, each of said plurality of weights being associated with a node in the tree, said weight representing an amount of time to complete a portion of processing represented by said node; receiving a plurality of first metrics determined at a point in time for said plurality of tasks, each of said plurality of first metrics corresponding to a first of the plurality of tasks indicating an amount of said first task completed at said point in time; receiving a request to determine progress of said transaction at said point in time, said progress representing an amount of said transaction that has completed at said point in time; and determining said progress in accordance with said tree and said plurality of weights, wherein said determining said progress of said transaction includes determining an amount for each of said plurality of tasks by multiplying one of the plurality of first metrics for said each task by one of said plurality of weights corresponding to said each task, wherein at least a first of the plurality of weights associated with one of the plurality of tasks is more than a second of the plurality of weights associated with a different one of the plurality of tasks thereby indicating that the one task is expected to take longer to complete than said different one of the plurality of tasks.
A method for determining transaction progress represents the transaction and its tasks as a tree structure. The transaction is the root node, and tasks are descendant nodes. Each node (task) has a weight representing the time to complete its portion. To determine transaction progress, the method receives weights, task completion metrics at a point in time, and a request for transaction progress. It then calculates progress using the tree structure and weights, multiplying each task's completion metric by its weight. Tasks with longer estimated durations have higher weights.
14. The method of claim 13 , wherein each of said plurality of tasks represented by a first node in the tree determines its progress by aggregating progress information from any descendant nodes of said first node, said first node reporting its progress to another task corresponding to its parent node.
The tree-based transaction progress method, as previously described, has tasks represented by nodes in a tree. Each task calculates its progress by aggregating progress data from its descendant nodes. The task then reports its calculated progress to its parent node, contributing to the overall transaction progress calculation. This recursive aggregation provides a hierarchical view of transaction completion.
15. A non-transitory computer readable medium comprising code stored thereon for determining progress of a transaction comprising, the non-transitory computer readable medium comprising code for: receiving a plurality of weights; each of said plurality of weights indicating a weight for a different one of a plurality of tasks performed to complete processing for said transaction; determining, at a point in time, a plurality of first metrics for said plurality of tasks, each of said plurality of first metrics corresponding to a first of said plurality of tasks and indicating an amount of said first task completed at said point in time; and determining a second metric indicating an amount of processing completed for said transaction at said point in time, wherein said second metric is determined in accordance with said plurality of first metrics and said plurality of weights, wherein said determining said second metric includes determining an amount for each of said plurality of tasks by multiplying one of the plurality of first metrics for said each task by one of said plurality of weights corresponding to said each task, wherein at least a first of the plurality of weights associated with one of the plurality of tasks is more than a second of the plurality of weights associated with a different one of the plurality of tasks thereby indicating that the one task is expected to take longer to complete than said different one of the plurality of tasks.
A non-transitory computer readable medium stores code for determining transaction progress by: receiving weights for individual tasks within a transaction, where each weight indicates the relative importance of a task; determining task completion metrics at a specific time; and calculating overall transaction progress by combining the task metrics, weighted by their assigned weights. Tasks with longer expected durations have higher weights. The overall progress is calculated by multiplying the progress of each task by its corresponding weight and summing those values.
16. The non-transitory computer readable medium of claim 15 , wherein each of said plurality of weights is an integer and each of said plurality of first metrics indicates a percentage.
The non-transitory computer readable medium for transaction progress, as previously described, uses integer values for task weights and percentage values for task completion metrics. The combination of these two types of values allows the computer code to easily calculate the overall progress of the transaction based on the relative importance and completion status of each task.
17. The non-transitory computer readable medium of claim 15 , wherein each of said plurality of tasks determines a corresponding one of said plurality of first metrics representing progress of said each task.
The non-transitory computer readable medium for transaction progress, as previously described, features tasks that determine their own progress and report it via the metric. The code stored on the medium is configured such that each task computes a corresponding progress metric. This self-reporting enhances the accuracy of overall transaction progress calculation.
18. The non-transitory computer readable medium of claim 15 , wherein each weight associated with one of said plurality of tasks indicates an amount of time to complete said one task relative to an amount of time to complete said transaction.
The non-transitory computer readable medium storing code for determining transaction progress, as previously described, uses weights that reflect the time each task requires relative to the total transaction time. This enables assessing progress based on time consumed, highlighting potential delays. The computer code weights each task according to its expected duration to improve the accuracy of total progress.
Cooperative Patent Classification codes for this invention. Click any code to explore related patents in that topic.
September 30, 2010
July 2, 2013
Browse 5M+ US patents with plain-English claim translations and AI-generated analysis.